|
Post Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
10-05-2012, 10:15 AM | #133 |
Lieutenant
28
Rep 498
Posts |
Why would BMW bring a 450bhp M3 but only clain it had 420bhp? I don't get all this 'it will make more power than quoted'.Wouldn't BMW sell more cars if based on the headline HP figure?
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-05-2012, 10:19 AM | #134 | |
Second Lieutenant
16
Rep 281
Posts
Drives: like grandma
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: New England
|
Quote:
My M3 lease is up in August 2013, so I'm also trying to figure out my next step. Aside from performance, could you live with a GT-R? I've asked myself the same thing and I'm not sure I could. The GT-R is great, don't get me wrong. But, the interior is pitifully subpar and tiny. My previous car was a 335ix and I seriously considered the GT-R, but ended up with the M3. Keep in mind, my M3 is my DD; I don't have another car.
__________________
Last edited by ///Mperative; 10-05-2012 at 10:36 AM.. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-05-2012, 11:10 AM | #135 | |
Colonel
503
Rep 2,397
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-05-2012, 11:14 AM | #136 |
First Lieutenant
52
Rep 348
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-05-2012, 12:15 PM | #137 |
Enlisted Member
6
Rep 33
Posts |
You guys are forgetting that m3 doesn't exist in its own little world. We saw rescently that competition closed on m5. Now c63 as of now have 480 ponies and it is still detuned! They can give it 590 ponies SLS GT have with a single phonecall. And dont forget that no bimmer in history sounded as mercs 6.2 beast.
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-05-2012, 12:37 PM | #138 |
Banned
100
Rep 1,265
Posts
Drives: 1973 Jensen Interceptor
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Shanghai, People's Republic of China
|
Not having an E46 sedan M3 wasnt a disappointment,the original M3 only came with 2 doors.
-Playing the engine note in the case of the new M5 through the stereo is a disappointment. -The M5 used to be the benchmark,class leader...now it's usually placed in the middle of the pack. You even get reviewer referring to an M car engine as boring without a soul,exhibing turbo lag enough to drive around it. |
Appreciate
0
|
10-05-2012, 01:02 PM | #139 | |
Lieutenant General
634
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
Something is fishy with the numbers for sure.
__________________
E92 M3 | Space Gray on Fox Red | M-DCT | CF Roof | RAC RG63 Wheels | Brembo 380mm BBK | | Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust | Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors | | Alekshop Back up Camera | GP Thunders | BMW Aluminum Pedals | Elite Angels | | XPEL Full Front Wrap | Hardwired V1 | Interior Xenon Light Kit | |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-05-2012, 01:13 PM | #140 |
Lieutenant General
634
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Sounds like a real upper limit on what could be saved. The existing hood weighs 10 kg and trunk weighs almost 11. Doors are 18 kg ea. Throw in an extra 5 kg for a steel instead of the light E92 aluminum hood and you have about 62 kg. If you cut 66% of the weight (very agressive design) you would save right around 41 kg, almost 100 lb.
__________________
E92 M3 | Space Gray on Fox Red | M-DCT | CF Roof | RAC RG63 Wheels | Brembo 380mm BBK | | Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust | Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors | | Alekshop Back up Camera | GP Thunders | BMW Aluminum Pedals | Elite Angels | | XPEL Full Front Wrap | Hardwired V1 | Interior Xenon Light Kit | |
Appreciate
0
|
10-05-2012, 01:34 PM | #141 | |
Lieutenant General
634
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
1. Power is inherently a dynamic concept, it is the rate of energy transfer. In no way is it "static figure". None of your touchy feely imprecise definitions above are correct or meaningful. 2. Crank torque is absolutely meaningless. It does not come into the equations for acceleration without gearing. Wheel torque is meaningful but torque proponents barely bother calculating it. You cannot "read" vehicle acceleration from a dyno curve. Show the actual equation/conversion then we will talk more about that. 3. It is always better to know a full curve rather than a single point. Either torque or hp along with rpm gives you the other. The complete information is there. If you need to stick to a single peak number hp is the one that will tell you very closely how fast the car will be. You can't say how fast it will be with the torque number, you just can't. 4. At any given speed if two cars weigh the same the one that produced the most power will out accelerate the other, PERIOD, INDISPUTABLE. This car that makes the most peak torque or the most instantaneous torque is utterly inconsequential. I know you probably can't handle the equations but this is from P = m x a x v. The only way the 1M owns the M3 is when the M3 is driven improperly in the wrong gear. At the "wrong" rpm the M3 makes little torque which translates into little power. The 1M is kind of opposite. The 1Ms ability to produce good low rpm power does help is get off the line very quick, every bit as quick as the M3. Of course its lighter weight is very advantageous for handling and gives it an advantage on smaller tighter courses. Overall the cars perform consistently with their (peak) power to weight ratio. Why, because that is the physics. Until you understand the equations, the physics, make some spreadsheets, run some of your own simulations you just won't understand. It takes some work but you will be rewarded with a lot of insight when you do.
__________________
E92 M3 | Space Gray on Fox Red | M-DCT | CF Roof | RAC RG63 Wheels | Brembo 380mm BBK | | Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust | Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors | | Alekshop Back up Camera | GP Thunders | BMW Aluminum Pedals | Elite Angels | | XPEL Full Front Wrap | Hardwired V1 | Interior Xenon Light Kit | |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-05-2012, 01:39 PM | #142 | |
Lieutenant General
634
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
The new car WILL make more power than the existing car. It is just a question of how much more and likely under rating.
__________________
E92 M3 | Space Gray on Fox Red | M-DCT | CF Roof | RAC RG63 Wheels | Brembo 380mm BBK | | Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust | Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors | | Alekshop Back up Camera | GP Thunders | BMW Aluminum Pedals | Elite Angels | | XPEL Full Front Wrap | Hardwired V1 | Interior Xenon Light Kit | |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-05-2012, 01:51 PM | #143 |
Colonel
721
Rep 2,003
Posts |
Agree with the 7500k rpm redline as wishful thinking from an I6 vs. V8 7200k.. more likely it will be lower.
HP is the true measure of power. Torque@RPM is not really relevant, but HP@rpm is because in everyday situations you are at <2000rpm and not >6000. Max. Torque or torque is an irrelavent number because you must multiplie it to RPM to get HP, which is the only measure of POWER or work done, in physics. High torque at low RPM 'feels' more powefully because what you feel is the turbos coming on boost, which is simply the abrupt increase in power (HP) that is more smooth in NA engines. (feel of power=change in HP wrt time) |
Appreciate
0
|
10-05-2012, 02:00 PM | #144 | |
Lieutenant General
634
Rep 10,407
Posts |
Quote:
Let's look at piston speeds. US units, sorry Uli... N55: 68.6 ft/s S65: 69.1 ft/s S63Tu: 70.1 ft/s Thus non-stroked S55(?) at 7500 rpm: 73.5 ft/s Stroked S55(?) to 3.2l at 7500 rpm: 78.4 ft/s Ferrari 458: 79.7 ft/s I know, I know don't compare BMW and Ferrari. That complaint falls flat though when looking at the S65, it is the closest to a Ferrari engine in any other production car. From this I think it is fair to say that even a stroked 3.2l S55(?) could support a redline of 7500 rpm. Of course there is the question of Valvetronic and its rpm limit. I've only heard rumors about that.
__________________
E92 M3 | Space Gray on Fox Red | M-DCT | CF Roof | RAC RG63 Wheels | Brembo 380mm BBK | | Vorsteiner Ti Exhaust | Matte Black Grilles/Side Gills/Rear Emblem/Mirrors | | Alekshop Back up Camera | GP Thunders | BMW Aluminum Pedals | Elite Angels | | XPEL Full Front Wrap | Hardwired V1 | Interior Xenon Light Kit | |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-05-2012, 02:01 PM | #145 |
Private First Class
28
Rep 134
Posts |
I have learned a lot about trq/hp/wt reading comments in this thread!
To be honest, I personally don't believe in numbers on a spec sheet, but in the final/finished product. For example, every time a new Audi is released, I get flattered with its specs and performance on paper.. And although I wouldn't buy one, I have test driven a couple lately (rs5 and ttrs) only to find out that the finished product/all parts put together IMO is not a translation of the promise on paper. I would say its always better to understate (hp claim) than to disappoint! BMW M has never failed to impress and develop best in class cars within their segments, so I'm just waiting impatiently for the upcoming M-onster to hit the showrooms. |
Appreciate
0
|
10-05-2012, 02:19 PM | #146 | |
First Lieutenant
52
Rep 348
Posts |
Quote:
At the end it would be very nice to get a 7er that weights as much as the new F20 3er. Handling in everyday traffic would reach new levels. However, there is always the price and a very slow progress in auto industry. The investment in this lightweight would be very intense while the fuel problem at the opposite end (hydrogen cells or artificial oil) remains unsolved. The fuel prices (heavily taxed here in Europe) are already having a heavy toll on work migration and "freedom" of driving. To manage to get independent from the tax hike would be a real revolution here |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-05-2012, 02:24 PM | #147 | ||
New Member
1
Rep 23
Posts |
Quote:
|
||
Appreciate
0
|
10-05-2012, 02:34 PM | #148 |
Private First Class
27
Rep 106
Posts |
Those look like 911 numbers vice cayman's more 50, which is good to have weight on the rear driving wheels but creates a higher polar momentum inducing oversteer right? Isn't this the flaw with the 911?
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-05-2012, 02:37 PM | #149 | |
Private First Class
27
Rep 106
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-05-2012, 02:43 PM | #150 |
Major
196
Rep 1,248
Posts |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-05-2012, 03:13 PM | #151 |
Private First Class
27
Rep 106
Posts |
I'll agree with you on Motortrend but Car and Driver is the New York Times of automotive journalism.
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-05-2012, 03:22 PM | #152 | |
Lieutenant
108
Rep 585
Posts |
Quote:
Its expensive to reinforce the chrankshaft and the bearings so that they could withstand this forces ... esp. in longer times in use ... and I donīt know if BMW would do this, if cost-reduction is the main issue and they are of the opinion that 420hp are enough to be better as all competitors. |
|
Appreciate
0
|
10-05-2012, 03:24 PM | #153 |
Private First Class
12
Rep 139
Posts |
And why is that?
__________________
09 E92 M3
2011 Ducati 848 |
Appreciate
0
|
10-05-2012, 03:26 PM | #154 |
New Member
0
Rep 10
Posts |
Jesus, why all the panic? It's quite funny reading some of the comments, some of you sound like a bunch of bench racers. And where did that 420hp figure come from anyway? What was stated in the original post is that it should be in the ballpark of the E9X M3 (NO precise HP figures given), which seems to me like it was deliberately meant to create ambiguity. I don't get all the frantic conjecturing going on, we all know numbers only represent one side of the story, numbers which in this case are only ESTIMATES. The car still has a year and a half left for development if the date predictions are correct, so give it some time a little...
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|